本文選題：集體土地 + 宅基地房屋拆遷��； 參考：《湖南大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：隨著農(nóng)村居民身份轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)槌鞘芯用竦那樾卧龆�，�?dāng)轉(zhuǎn)城居民在農(nóng)村的合法宅基地房屋遭遇拆遷問題時(shí)，出現(xiàn)了很多權(quán)利被侵害的情況，同時(shí)也出現(xiàn)了由于宅基地房屋拆遷而導(dǎo)致的各種矛盾激化問題，轉(zhuǎn)城居民的農(nóng)村宅基地房屋拆遷的相關(guān)權(quán)利如何保障的問題值得研究。 原告陽(yáng)某及其子女張某等是轉(zhuǎn)城居民，原告與被告之間簽訂了《房屋買賣協(xié)議》，買受人在房屋面臨拆遷時(shí)，在合同約定其不享有土地處置權(quán)利的情況下拆除了房屋，村委會(huì)則以房屋滅失為由收回了房屋范圍內(nèi)的集體土地使用權(quán)，，原告請(qǐng)求法院確認(rèn)《房屋買賣協(xié)議》無效而發(fā)生糾紛。法院最終判決該《房屋買賣協(xié)議》有效，并駁回了原告返還房屋所有權(quán)的訴訟請(qǐng)求。該案的特殊性就表現(xiàn)在轉(zhuǎn)城居民繼承的農(nóng)村集體土地上的房屋面臨拆遷時(shí)，是否享有拆遷權(quán)利的問題以及該案的原告的權(quán)利是否被侵權(quán)。但在該案件處理過程中，代理律師如果使用不同的訴訟策略得到的救濟(jì)結(jié)果不同，原審律師采用了合同之訴并沒有達(dá)到維護(hù)原告利益的效果，如果采用侵權(quán)之訴則能夠更好的達(dá)到保護(hù)作為轉(zhuǎn)城居民的原告利益的目的。通過對(duì)這些問題的分析同時(shí)結(jié)合目前農(nóng)村房屋土地案件處理的現(xiàn)況及發(fā)展趨勢(shì)，可以尋求類似問題更好的解決方法。在我國(guó)目前的法律環(huán)境下，轉(zhuǎn)城居民的宅基地房屋沒有很好的退出機(jī)制，國(guó)家法律應(yīng)當(dāng)保障集體土地房屋拆遷過程中作為轉(zhuǎn)城居民拆遷戶的利益不受非法侵犯。因此，國(guó)家應(yīng)當(dāng)盡快制定農(nóng)村房屋拆遷管理?xiàng)l例，解決廣大的農(nóng)村集體土地房屋拆遷日益突出并不斷激化的社會(huì)矛盾和問題。
[Abstract]:As the status of rural residents has changed into urban residents, when the legal homestead houses in rural areas are being demolished, many rights have been infringed upon.At the same time, there are various contradictions caused by the demolition of homestead houses, and it is worth studying how to protect the rights of the rural homestead house demolition of urban residents.The plaintiff, Yang Mou and his child, Zhang, were residents of the city. The plaintiff and the defendant signed a "house sale agreement". When the house was facing demolition, the buyer demolished the house when the contract stipulated that he did not have the right to dispose of the land.The village committee took back the collective land use right on the grounds of house loss, and the plaintiff asked the court to confirm that the house sale agreement was invalid.The court finally ruled that the agreement was valid and rejected the plaintiff's claim to return home ownership.The particularity of this case is that when the houses on the rural collective land inherited by the residents of the city are faced with demolition, whether they enjoy the right of demolition and whether the rights of the plaintiffs in this case are infringed.However, in the course of handling the case, if the lawyer used different litigation strategies to obtain different relief results, the original trial lawyer adopted the contract action and did not achieve the effect of safeguarding the interests of the plaintiff.If the tort action is adopted, it can better protect the interests of the plaintiff.Based on the analysis of these problems and the current situation and development trend of rural housing land cases, we can find a better solution to similar problems.In the current legal environment of our country, there is no good exit mechanism for the house and house of the residents of the city, and the national law should protect the interests of the residents who are the residents of the city from being infringed illegally in the process of the demolition of the collective land houses.Therefore, the country should formulate the regulations of the rural house demolition management as soon as possible to solve the social contradictions and problems which are increasingly prominent and intensified in the rural collective land house demolition.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湖南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：D920.5;D923.6;D922.32

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前4條

1 盧陽(yáng);關(guān)于農(nóng)村宅基地產(chǎn)權(quán)的調(diào)查分析[J];成都教育學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2005年06期

2 王留彥;;宅基地使用權(quán)與房屋繼承權(quán)的沖突探析[J];改革與戰(zhàn)略;2011年10期

3 劉震宇;張麗洋;;論農(nóng)村宅基地使用權(quán)的取得[J];海南大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(人文社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2011年02期

4 任中秀;;關(guān)于農(nóng)村宅基地使用權(quán)繼承的法律思考[J];山西高等學(xué)校社會(huì)科學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2011年11期

本文編號(hào)：1751869